D&D 4E 4e, minis... and some of my thoughts

[Imaro]

First let me clarify this question before discussion starts. By using the term mini, I am refering to any counter, token or other representation of a character, monster, NPC, etc.

Now I personally have been thinking about this for awhile and think that 4e will definitely be more mini-centric. Why?

Battles with numerous opponents as opposed to singular or small groups...How much harder will it be to keep track of the position, cover, concealment, etc. of 20 goblins plus five PC's. The new game makes this the norm as opposed to the exceptional battle.

SW saga ed. definitely states that one needs minis to play (whether this is true or not is irrelevant to the new player picking it up for the first time, he/she wil assume they are necessary for play).

The newest DoD minis...again we have commonly used monsters (trolls & ogres) as rares. This is not a problem that can be solved through the secondary market since many rares cost way too much.




More to come...but what are others thoughts on this matter?

 

[Shortman McLeod]

The newest DoD minis...again we have commonly used monsters (trolls & ogres) as rares. This is not a problem that can be solved through the secondary market since many rares cost way too much.

More to come...but what are others thoughts on this matter?

(Shrug) I agree that 4e will be even more minis-based than 3.5, but for a simpler reason than you . . . WotC made a poopload of $$$ on the minis from 3.5, and it would be madness for them not to shake that money tree even further.

Speaking as one who likes minis, BTW.

 

[Imaro]

(Shrug) I agree that 4e will be even more minis-based than 3.5, but for a simpler reason than you . . . WotC made a poopload of $$$ on the minis from 3.5, and it would be madness for them not to shake that money tree even further.

Speaking as one who likes minis, BTW.

It's not that I don't like them...not keen on the random structure but other companies are stepping up to fill that niche. I do find them an inconvenience as far as playing space goes. I use to run my Castles and Crusades after work game at a friend's bar and it only worked out because I didn't have to use a battlemat/minis/etc...Actually this was one of the deciding factors for me going with C&C instead of D&D for that particular game.

I just feel that they won't be as optional as everybody claims they will be. At least not without substantial fudging and houseruling.

 

[Shortman McLeod]

It's not that I don't like them...not keen on the random structure but other companies are stepping up to fill that niche. I do find them an inconvenience as far as playing space goes. I use to run my Castles and Crusades after work game at a friend's bar and it only worked out because I didn't have to use a battlemat/minis/etc...Actually this was one of the deciding factors for me going with C&C instead of D&D for that particular game.

I just feel that they won't be as optional as everybody claims they will be. At least not without substantial fudging and houseruling.

Realistically, though, how can minis NOT be required, given the logistics of a huge combat scenario?

Consider this: a party of five adventurers (one of them--ugh--a "Warlord") encounters 20 goblins. Some of the goblins have cover behind trees, some are hiding up IN the trees, and some are using ranged weapons, while others are using area of effect spells.

The party of adventurers spreads out; the wizard plans to use ranged spells, the ranger plans to shoot a few arrows, etc.

How on earth do you NOT use minis to represent this combat? Unless you want to just completely ignore all the distance, terrain, cover, and environmental details that make it interesting and just say something like this:

DM: "Okay, ranger, you can attack. Go ahead."
Ranger: "I attack, uh, goblin #4."
DM: "Roll."
Ranger: "Wait, how far away is the goblin?"
DM: "Doesn't matter. We aren't using minis. This is a role-playing game, dammit! Just attack."
Ranger: "(Sigh). I roll."

 

[Zamkaizer]

Until someone figures out an exceptional way of tracking combat non-visually, I'll be representing battles using homemade tokens constructed lovingly using fantasy art provided by the internet, printer and paper, scissors and paste, and veritable boatload of foamcore. Perhaps some black spraypaint to give the edges a professional sheen.

 

[Imaro]

Realistically, though, how can minis NOT be required, given the logistics of a huge combat scenario?

Consider this: a party of five adventurers (one of them--ugh--a "Warlord") encounters 20 goblins. Some of the goblins have cover behind trees, some are hiding up IN the trees, and some are using ranged weapons, while others are using area of effect spells.

The party of adventurers spreads out; the wizard plans to use ranged spells, the ranger plans to shoot a few arrows, etc.

How on earth do you NOT use minis to represent this combat? Unless you want to just completely ignore all the distance, terrain, cover, and environmental details that make it interesting and just say something like this:

DM: "Okay, ranger, you can attack. Go ahead."
Ranger: "I attack, uh, goblin #4."
DM: "Roll."
Ranger: "Wait, how far away is the goblin?"
DM: "Doesn't matter. We aren't using minis. This is a role-playing game, dammit! Just attack."
Ranger: "(Sigh). I roll."

Hey, you'll find no argument here...I wonder this about people who claim 3.5 is easy to run without minis.

 

[Cbas_10]

First let me clarify this question before discussion starts. By using the term mini, I am refering to any counter, token or other representation of a character, monster, NPC, etc.

Now I personally have been thinking about this for awhile and think that 4e will definitely be more mini-centric. Why?

Others here already beat me to the punch...I have the same feelings: especially with the push towards encounters including larger numbers of weaker opponents, how is this to be avoided?

Battles with numerous opponents as opposed to singular or small groups...How much harder will it be to keep track of the position, cover, concealment, etc. of 20 goblins plus five PC's. The new game makes this the norm as opposed to the exceptional battle.

Well, maybe to some people's games....others have always played games that include many weaker opponents. After PCs get to 3rd level, this type of scenario is quite easy to imagine. Even at 1st level, it is possible...just not as wide of a variety of opponents.

The newest DoD minis...again we have commonly used monsters (trolls & ogres) as rares. This is not a problem that can be solved through the secondary market since many rares cost way too much.

Simple marketing. Rares are the ones that players will want the most. It is nonetheless annoying to me (the random collectible nature), as I'm more interested in D&D than the minis game. However, I understand the marketing angle they are going with. Makes perfect business sense to me. I'd happily pay 10-15 bucks for 8 minis if I knew what was in the pack. But...I'll have to wait for a different company to find the money to be made in masses of cheap, basic, not-too-detailed plastic minis.

 

[WayneLigon]

I'm not how it could make 'more' use of minis than it does now. Then again, I'm of the opinion that D&D - and any RPG where range is important - flow better with some form of miniature.

The rare after-market D&D minis are a problem, since they don't seem to be going down in price. Heck, at DragonCon you had dealers trying to palm off recent commons a $1 a pop when they should have them 5- or 6-for-a-dollar at least.

 

[DaveMage]

This was one of things that pissed me off about 3.5.

In 3.0 the rulebook states that you can use mini, counters, or something similar to represent your character while 3.5 states minis (only) are required.

However, I'm not sure the minis will be as successful for WotC this time around. Certainly those that have been buying minis from day 1 do not need that many anymore. Since WotC is re-releasing a bunch, it's possible that the minis market will decline - and quickly.

We'll see...

 

[Cadfan]

Speaking as someone who just ran a war campaign without miniatures, it can be done. I just used hand drawn sketches, pencil on paper.

You just kind of eyeball distances, and go with the flow. As long as the group doesn't mind, it works out just fine. Most players I've met aren't used to precision in combat resolution.

I'm sure it would have been easier with miniatures, but playing without miniatures did work.